| This question <158|149> overall <140|142> Karly: <88|197>. |
| Question 306: Why does Marx say in footnote 38 to paragraph 177:3--4 that the commodities diamond, pearl, etc., only seem to possess relativity as exchange-values? Are exchange-values not relative by definition? |
| [141] Karly: A diamond is a girl's best friend. Marx states that commodities only seem to possess relativity as exchange values because commodities' values will differ between individuals. For example, a pearl may be much more valuable to a certain individual than to another, therefore creating its exchange value. |
| I believe exchange values are not relative by definition based on the fact of each individual's considered values. |
|
|
|||||